How do None Christians Response on Stigmata.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

---

While stigmata is real but as to whether or not they are providently divine is something I am skeptical of. The stigmata of St. Francis of Assisi for example was said to be the first recorded stigmata. However, science strongly believes that St. Francis could have been afflicted by the disease called "purpura" a hemmorhagic disease similar to malaria or dengue.

Recording stigmata is not a problem since it only needs to occur in the state that defines what is stigmata pero sa case ni St. Francis of Assisi , bro sa ilahang time do they know already what is PURPURA or ang science sa 21st century ang ni theorize ana ? DIli ko familiar sa stigmata kang St. Francis pod .

As for Padre Pio, the Catholic Church has not declared Pio's stigmata as authentic. "He was canonized in 2002, although not for his stigmata, the Catholic Church never having declared the alleged phenomenon miraculous." (D'Emilio 2002; Tokasz 2003).

Theories have been forwarded that stigmata can also be induced by both hypnosis or auto-hypnosis (self-hypnosis).

Stigmata is not supposed to be miraculous but just plain phenomenal since justification of it na if its Gods work or not cant be formalized as to where it belongs or which side of good or evil . Gisalida na man to sa Discovery CHannel bai na si Padre Pio kay authentic to ang stigmata niya kahibungan nila , the blood that bleeds kay dili man ang iyahang bloodtype and it happens only during the time he celebrates the Holy Mass . There is no way na naay lain supply of bag that holds the blood na maoy i bleed . ANyways , kadtong bloodtype sa bleed kay same bloodtype sa mga miraculous cup of wine na nahimong blood pod literally hand in hand with the eucharist na nahimong flesh literally pod .

[brownprose]

Recording stigmata is not a problem since it only needs to occur in the state that defines what is stigmata pero sa case ni St. Francis of Assisi , bro sa ilahang time do they know already what is PURPURA or ang science sa 21st century ang ni theorize ana ? DIli ko familiar sa stigmata kang St. Francis pod.

I remember a documentary back in the 90s that covered the subject on stigmata. It was generally theorized that it was purpura because St. Francis exiled himself to the forest (in which some Catholic scholars account that he was always naked) and it was highly probable that he contracted the disease there. For a person as holy St. Francis, it may not come as a surprise (back then) when people attribute such rare bleeding as divinely ordained. I tend to believe in the explanation of science for there were equally holy men and women after Jesus and the Apostles' time and yet no accounts have been recorded only until St. Francis' time and onwards.

Stigmata is not supposed to be miraculous but just plain phenomenal since justification of it na if its Gods work or not cant be formalized as to where it belongs or which side of good or evil . Gisalida na man to sa Discovery CHannel bai na si Padre Pio kay authentic to ang stigmata niya kahibungan nila , the blood that bleeds kay dili man ang iyahang bloodtype and it happens only during the time he celebrates the Holy Mass . There is no way na naay lain supply of bag that holds the blood na maoy i bleed . ANyways , kadtong bloodtype sa bleed kay same bloodtype sa mga miraculous cup of wine na nahimong blood pod literally hand in hand with the eucharist na nahimong flesh literally pod .

Yes. There were occurrences of stigmata that were deemed "authentic" as yet for lack of scientific explanation. But there were are also fakes. As for Padre Pio's case, it is too early to conclude kay even the Catholic Church has kept a skeptical view of his stigmata at this time. But be that as it may, Catholics should be more circumspect to accept "supernatural" occurrences or miraculous claims until the church declares so.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

^^^^

Pero what if gi officiate na sa Vatican na authentic bro and walay thumbs up sa SCIENCE ? I remember na a lot of issues and occurence that SCIENCE submitted because of miracles let alone the latest one in SOuth Korea about Sister Kim . Anyways , I dont think SCIENCE ang basehan sa STIGMATA , though they can only theorized like the PURPURA .

[handsoff241]

Isn't it ironic that the same tool the Catholic church use to authenticate miracles is the same tool that fuels the movement against it?

[regnauld]

more realistic is ASTIGMATISM

Yes especially when you are suffering from Nearsightedness or mypoia and farsightedness or hyperopia! hahaha

[handsoff241]

^hahaha amawa

[brownprose]

^^^^

Pero what if gi officiate na sa Vatican na authentic bro and walay thumbs up sa SCIENCE ?

That being the case, it is up to the catholic flock which side to believe. AFAIK, the catholic church doesn't encourage (I'm not sure of this) its faithfuls to embrace wholly on miraculous events since the encyclical on Fides et Ratio where it made clear that faith and reason are not only compatible, but essential together. In the words of Pope John Paull II Faith without reason leads to superstition.

It is thus incumbent upon the faithful to be vigilant over claims of providence like a stigmata, the shedding of tears of a religious icon and etc. as they could be just man-made or naturally occurring. However, in spite of the encyclical, it is just unfortunate that a lot of catholics choose the mystical side of the faith.

I remember na a lot of issues and occurence that SCIENCE submitted because of miracles let alone the latest one in SOuth Korea about Sister Kim . Anyways , I dont think SCIENCE ang basehan sa STIGMATA , though they can only theorized like the PURPURA .

Agree. I think the catholic church is mature enough to know the difference.

[tripwire]

How do None Christians Response on Stigmata?

Sir, just to clarify. Would it be you're referring to "Non-Christians" than the word NONE? But I guess the posts were all about "Not Christians".

For me, it's hard to convince such things nowadays because there are too many hoaxes. Even the Vatican admits that it will take time or years to acknowledge apparitions, bleeding eyes of a statue, or healing statue and even stigmata. Most of their findings, they are hoaxes.

[babypaupau]

Isn't it ironic that the same tool the Catholic church use to authenticate miracles is the same tool that fuels the movement against it?

what do you mean?

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

Sir, just to clarify. Would it be you're referring to "Non-Christians" than the word NONE? But I guess the posts were all about "Not Christians".

For me, it's hard to convince such things nowadays because there are too many hoaxes. Even the Vatican admits that it will take time or years to acknowledge apparitions, bleeding eyes of a statue, or healing statue and even stigmata. Most of their findings, they are hoaxes.

Theres a lot of exceptions though and 1 of them is the case of SISTER KIM from SOUTH KOREA whom herself is not a Christian , much more being a Catholic . Her conversion happened the very hour the miracle occured to her inside one of the churches she was so curious about and attended the services it rendered to the faithfuls .